Posted on 01/10/2008 1:11:53 AM PST by Kevmo
What value were polls other than anti-democratic?
The polls had it wrong over New Hampshire. And it was polls that were used to exclude Hunter from the New Hampshire debates, the same debates which proved that polls were wrong. But poll results are still valid for EXCLUDING candidates like Hunter, who actually had a DELEGATE that REAL VOTERs voted for, while Rudy had NONE, but look at his polls! Now the same travesty is happening in South Carolina.
For the Republican side, half right is more than half wrong when you’re relying on the data to exclude someone from the process of democracy. And if they were wrong, how do we know they were right on the republican side? The prevailing assumption should be that they need to PROVE their data is reliable, but by excluding a candidate that could have done well in that state if he had access to the media, they AFFECTED THE OUTCOME.
CONSERVATISM vs. REPUBLICANISM
I don’t see how anyone can defend this action when it affects a conservative. This is a conservative forum, not a GOP one. It’s not just the GOP that’s jumping the shark, they’re taking Free Republic with them. On the latest poll, "I’ll vote R regardless" is leading the pack. I call people who vote this way UIN republicans, because they’ll vote for anything with an R in front of it, regardless of what it means.
Free Republic’s (1/9) poll on Republican candidates’ liberal positions that would be deal killers
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=210;results=1
thread discussion
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951136/posts
Free Republic used to be a gathering place for conservatives. Now it’s becoming a gathering place of republicans. Putting republicanism ahead of conservatism is the opposition to the aims of this website.
JimRob says, “We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.” Freepers who are defending the fact that Hunter was excluded from the debates are in direct opposition to this tenet.
From the front page of Free Republic:
Statement by the founder of Free Republic As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. .... We are not connected to or funded by any political party, news agency, or any other entity. .... We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.
This is NOT a GOP website, it says so right there, we have no affiliation with any party... That often catches republicans by surprise.
CHANCES OF WINNING
For those who don’t think we defend the country by voting for people who have next to zero chance of winning , they need to realize that THIS IS COMPLETE BALONEY. Right NOW, on Intrade, the folks who make it their business to deal in “chance of winning” and make money helping others trade on those chances have Hunter and Thompson EQUAL in chance to win the president race.
chances on intrade -- snapshot http://www.intrade.com
2008.PRES.THOMPSON(F)
Fred Thompson to win 2008 US Presidential Election M 0.2 0.4 0.2 41936 -0.1
2008.PRES.FIELD
Field (any other candidate) to win 2008 US Presidential Election M 0.2 0.3 0.2 18051 +0.0
USING INTRADE RESULTS I know that many freepers do not view futures markets with as much confidence as I do. But many of those same freepers view Polls with confidence. The article below is but one example of how futures markets are more reliable than poll results.
The Efficacy Of Prediction Markets The Liberty Papers ^ |
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1922961/posts
Whenever I post results from Intrade, there’s often a back & forth about how this data isn’t reliable, it’s subject to manipulation, all that stuff. All of these items are discussed and explained on this thread.
Futures market data that has proven to be more reliable than polling data, which is why Rasmussen started using Intrade results on their website. Rasmussen is the first polling organization to start using and referencing futures market data. In particular, once you look at the data and the interface, you’ll realize that it’s just a frontpiece for Intrade.
“Our prediction market for Iowa turned out to be very accurate,” Rasmussen said.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1948537/posts?page=53#53
Rasmussen started using Intrade results.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1945852/posts
THE PRACTICAL RESULT
The practical result was a failure in our democracy and it DIRECTLY affected the most conservative man in the race for the GOP presidency. By defending the practice, such freepers are betraying that they are a republican first, conservative second. Usually, it’s because this travesty did not affect their candidate. That is not how conservatism is forwarded. But it IS how republicanism is forwarded.
Hunter, as a result of this cascaded failure of democratic process, is excluced from the South Carolina debate. Recall that Hunter had a statistical tie with Giuliani for the lead in the Spartanburg straw poll. But for the media, that doesn’t mean anything, poll results that they decide are important are the ones being used. Is this what the primary process was designed to do, this early in the game? NO!
Six candidates to participate in historic 2008 S.C. GOP Presidential Candidates Debate (No Hunter)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1950953/posts
Everyone on FR, anyone that calls themselves a conservative or an American should be outraged. But Free Republic has changed. It looks more each day like a de facto branch of the GOP. There will not be this outrage that once characterized Freepers, because this travesty favors their guy. One more nail in the coffin for conservatism, delivered and gift wrapped by the GOP.
If Thompson drops out, will he most likely endorse his friend McCain? If he does endorse McCain, how will Thompson followers feel? Do most freepers feel that such an endorsement would be a good thing or a bad thing? If such a thing as the exclusion from debates happened to your candidate, what would you expect from the GOP, as well as from Freepers? When you see that not taking place, would that change the way you view Free Republic, as a bastion of conservatism? If Hunter drops out, he’ll most likely endorse Fred. If Hunter drops, then Fred drops, we will all be pissed if the first scenario comes true, and there is no conservative in the race.
Free Republic’s (1/9) poll on Republican candidates’ liberal positions that would be deal killers
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=210;results=1
thread discussion
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951136/posts
chances on intrade -- snapshot http://www.intrade.com
The Efficacy Of Prediction Markets The Liberty Papers ^ |
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1922961/posts
“Our prediction market for Iowa turned out to be very accurate,” Rasmussen said.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1948537/posts?page=53#53
Rasmussen started using Intrade results.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1945852/posts
Six candidates to participate in historic 2008 S.C. GOP Presidential Candidates Debate (No Hunter)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1950953/posts
For the Duncan Hunter Ping List
Links:
Free Republic’s (1/9) poll on Republican candidates’ liberal positions that would be deal killers
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=210;results=1
thread discussion
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951136/posts
chances on intrade — snapshot http://www.intrade.com
The Efficacy Of Prediction Markets The Liberty Papers ^ |
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1922961/posts
“Our prediction market for Iowa turned out to be very accurate,” Rasmussen said.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1948537/posts?page=53#53
Rasmussen started using Intrade results.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1945852/posts
Six candidates to participate in historic 2008 S.C. GOP Presidential Candidates Debate (No Hunter)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1950953/posts
For the Duncan Hunter Ping list.
I e-mailed the head of the SC Republican Party yesterday and asked why they were in such a hurry to let the opinions of a bunch of Yankees decide who could even speak in South Carolina. No response, of course.
“...why they were in such a hurry to let the opinions of a bunch of Yankees decide who could even speak in South Carolina.”
You’d have thought they would have learned that lesson about 150 years ago.
Here’s one suggestion that I’ve floated:
When all the smoke clears, if Hunter doesn’t get the nomination, I have one more suggestion for all of us remaining conservative freepers. It would make sense for us to have an idealogy score, a set of questions with rankings of how important the issue is and how strongly a freeper agrees/disagrees with it. We could all put these results on our home pages, so that when another freeper is debating with us (or us with them) we could just go to their home page, check their score on that issue & others, and realize “Ohhh, this is a Ron Paul supporter” or “ohh, this guy is a small l libertarian” or “ohh, this guy is a Big F FISCAL Conservative and a small l social liberal.”
The Republican Party has always been made up of conservative, moderate, populist and liberal factions. The struggle for control by one group or another has been ongoing since the 1800's. In fact, I like the wide range of choices in candidates we have this year. Every faction of the party is represented which leads to healthy debate which is alot more than can be said for the cookie-cutter candidates put up by the Democrats.
If Fred Thompson, for instance, would be nominated would we conservatives appreciate it if the moderate and liberal wing would sit out the election because their candidate didn't win? Would conservatives have been OK with the moderates snubbing Reagan in 1980 and voting for John Anderson? Hardly.
The primary objective in this election, I believe, is to keep the radical wing of the Democrat Party (is there any other?) from gaining control of the White House and doing harm to our country through their social and economic experimentation. To do this we must support and vote for the candidate chosen by our party no matter whether we are 100% behind them or 30%. It is dangerous and even fool-hardy to do otherwise.
I didn’t leave the party, it left me. —Ronald Reagan
Sorry, Jim, but I think the stakes are too high this time to afford daliances with third parties or sitting out the election. We help elect a Republican president and then hold him accountable. It just might save the Republic.
Wonder what Michael Reagan thinks about this, and the MSM and Establishment knocking out fellow California conservative Duncan Hunter, and remembering Reagan's principled and passioned defense of opponent John B. Anderson to be included in a 1980 Debate? Maybe Michael Reagan could lobby to get Duncan included at the debate at his father's library and place of rest, which is scheduled for the end of this month in California.
The stakes were high in Reagan’s day too.
Don’t let them get away with choosing the candidates!
Contact: Rob Godfrey, SC GOP Communications Director
803.807.7144
The SC GOP main number: Phone: 803.988.8440
Fox News: 1-888-369-4762.
Your premise is wrong: the polls missed only the Dim standings in New Hampshire; probably, as Rush analyzed, because those Dims polled didn't want to appear to oppose the only minority candidate.
“We help elect a Republican president and then hold him accountable. It just might save the Republic.”
It seems like we tried that eight years ago (actually that exact process started in 1988, with an eight year hiatus for beelzabubba0. It would be hard for any conservative to say that conservatism has fared well since that time.
We did have a brief triumph in ‘94, but that seemed to be relatively short-lived.
I have seen more damage done to the conservative coalition, in the last eight years, than any time in history. We have been damaged, not because the Democrats were in power, but because the GOP has been in power. There have been numerous issues recently that have driven us apart instead of holding us together.
We (and I do not include “conservatives”) have been compromising ourselves right into the dustbin of history. Real conservatives know who they are and know that they, and the nation, are in grave peril.
Kevmo, is Hunter being dropped from another debate? I know Fox News dropped him from the NH debate.
As I wrote before, this is wrong. It is actually shaping the race rather than reporting on it. Fox News, in other words, took it upon themselves to tell us voters who we should vote for—the five anointed ones.
Now I’m not a Ron Paul supporter, but the man is a Republican candidate with a national following. He deserves a chance to speak. So does Duncan Hunter. Why should they have to pay for press when some get it for free (that’s what a debate is, free press).
I think we have ample evidence of the media’s role in shaping this race. Huckabee, for example, came out of nowhere. Ask yourself how that happened. Huckabee had almost no money, couldn’t pay to run ads, and suddenly he gets all sorts of positive press.
Also ask yourself why Thompson, a solid conservative who came in 3rd (NOT McPain) in Iowa and 2nd in Wyoming is constantly accused, by the media, of running a lackluster campaign. Fred is out there slogging away on a daily basis, yet he gets almost no positive press. SO, how in the world is he supposed to create a powerful campaign? Is he supposed to spend millions and millions for ads while the Huckster and McPain get their positive press for FREE?
Are we at the point in American politics where only candidates with personal fortunes or media darlings have a chance? I’m sorry to say, that’s the way it seems to me.
Unfortunately, I don’t think there’s a thing I can do about it other than to vote my principles regardless of what the media pundits or polls say.
You know it’s not just how debate participants are chosen. It’s that the news media is in a sense running our lives by deciding what’s important and what’s not, by placing undo importance on polls (always, not just during elections), by the use of “pundits” whose vanities can make or break a candidate.
Last night, when asked about Fred Thompson in SC, Krauthammer declared he was “dead”. A week and a half before the primary, and you’ve made the decision for the voters of SC? I mean really, how dare you be so presumptuous as to decide he’s out? He came in second in Wyoming, 3rd in Iowa, but he’s “dead”?? But Guiliani is somehow viable only because of their precious polling nationally. I guess it doesn’t occur to them how much that hurts a campaign.
And I am sorry for the Duncan Hunter supporters because the media decided he wasn’t worth covering before the race even started.
Sheeple,These rinos can go join the RAT party.Look what we got the last time we followed the partyline.
On the contrary,It does occur to the FAUX guys what they are doing.They are against a conservative candidate anyway you cut it.They have their marching orders and will not say anything positive with regards to Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson.rooty,romney mcnutts all the time.
You can call me any name you want but the fact is the RINOs aren't going to leave and join the RAT party. Either we are the ones who will leave in defeat or stay and fight to regain control of our party. I believe we must stay and be players in setting the agenda for the next eight years in the Republican Party.
We are engaged in a cultural war both within our party and with the Dems. I no more wish to cut and run from that war than I do from our war on terrorists. Look at it as a war on cultural terrorists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.